Bulb ban

Due to legislation introduced by Turnbull during the John Howard years the the sale of incandescent bulbs is prohibited as of today. More accurately the ban prohibits the sale of light bulbs with an efficacy of less than 15 lumens per watt (lm/W). I checked at the local supermarket and the shelf where the incandescent bulbs used to be was empty. Technological advances were going to see the incandescent replaced over time anyway. I suspect that the compact fluorescent bulbs that I have throughout my house will also be dated technology within a decade as long life LEDs drop in price. Conceivably we will see the day when light bulbs last nearly as long as the house.

The ban isn’t unique to Australia. The EU will see them banned by 2012 and the USA by 2014. Even so this law would have been a really good law to slap a sunset clause on.

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

6 thoughts on “Bulb ban”

The problem of course is that no one has ever done a life cycle carbon footprint of a CFL or an incandescant (which is so incredible near impossible – see ipencil). All they have done is focused on lumens per watt during use, even if it take 10Mwhours of energy to make the CFL they don’t care.

The ban is completely and utterly rediculous. If the bulbs are more energy efficient people would buy them on their own, they wouldn’t need to be forced by the goverment to do it.

Futhermore, why is the ban needed? In QLD for example the goverment is giving everyone 15 ‘free’ cfl’s from our taxes. I mean where does it end? Steal our money to pay for bulbs, ban us from buying other bulbs. All of that without anyone actually showing we are doing anything for the enviroment?

Not only that but they said our carbon foot print would redice by 600,000 tones per annum. Our really increase is in the millions. So if EVERY single bulb in australia was replaced instantly, we would reduce global warming by a whole 2 months. wow.

Yes Terje, the ban is wrong also for the energy and emission rationale behind it

It might sound good to ‘ban inefficent products’
But products that use more energy have performance, appearance,
construction and/or price advantages. http://www.ceolas.net/#cc2x

Put it this way with the light bulbs:

Americans (like Europeans, and I guess Australians) choose -or chose- to buy ordinary light bulbs around 8 to 9 times out of 10 (light industry data 2008).
Banning what people want gives the supposed savings – no point in banning an impopular product = no “savings”!

If new LED lights – or more efficient incandescents etc – are good,
people will buy them – no need to ban ordinary light bulbs (little point).
If they are not good, people will not buy them – no need to ban ordinary light bulbs (no point).
The arrival of the transistor didn’t mean that more energy using radio valves/tubes were banned… they were bought less anyway.

The need to save energy?
Advice is good and welcome, but bans are another matter…
ordinary citizens -not politicians – pay for energy, its production, and how they wish to use it.
There is no energy shortage – on the contrary, more and more renewable sources are being developed –
and if there was an energy shortage of the finite oil-coal-gas fuels,
then
1 renewable energy becomes more attractive price-wise
2 the fuel price rise would lead to more demand for efficient products – no need to legislate for it.
Any government worried about say oil use can simply tax it
(and imported oil is not used in electricity generation).

About electricity bills:
If electricity use does fall, the power companies have to put up prices to cover their overheads, maintenance costs, wage bills etc (using less fuel doesn’t compensate much in overall costs).

Emissions?
Does a light bulb give out any gases?
Power stations might not either:
Why should emission-free households be denied the use of lighting they obviously want to use?
Low emission households already dominate some regions, and will increase everywhere, since emissions will be reduced anyway through the planned use of coal/gas processing technology and/or energy substitution.

Direct ways to deal with emissions (for all else they contain too, whatever about CO2),
with a focus on transport and electricity:http://www.ceolas.net/#cc10x

The Taxation alternative

Taxation is just another unjustified way of targeting light bulbs – but might be a compromise solution:

A ban on light bulbs is extraordinary, in being on a product safe to use.
We are not talking about banning lead paint here.
This is simply a ban to supposedly reduce electricity consumption.

For those who favor bans, or who want to act quickly in targeting electricity consumption as well as production and distribution,
taxation to reduce any such consumption would therefore make more sense, governments can use the income to reduce emissions (home insulation schemes, renewable projects etc) more than any remaining product use causes such problems.

A few dollars tax that reduces the current sales (USA like the EU 2 billion sales per annum, UK 250-300 million pa, Australia ?150 million pa)
raises significant sums, and would retain consumer choice.
It could also be revenue neutral, lowering any sales tax on efficient products.
When sufficent low emission electricity delivery is in place, the ban can be liftedhttp://www.ceolas.net/LightBulbTax.html

But the real deal is simply to supply energy as needed with whatever emisssion criteria is needed,
and let consumers use and pay for what they want, in their own homes.

It seems that there is a report about today that GetUp is financially backed by the CFMEU. Of course, that would be a no brainer. The most radical and dangerous trade unions have been funding the Greens for years. See … Continue reading →

Dan Mitchell reports from DC. Just regulate it! And in France. According to the IEA, France is sitting on 80% of Europe’s frackable gas – enough to keep the country self-sufficient in energy for centuries. But the Macron government has … Continue reading →

Bold Green solutions. Make Australia a renewable superpower! 200% renewable energy!! These ideas are popular. They’re doable. They’re right at our fingertips. All we need is the political will. Just do it!!!